Table 4.

Univariate and multiple proportional hazards regression analyses using data from all patients (n=71)

				Univariate		Multiple Regression
Variable	Stratum Compared* (N)	P (Log-rank)	P (Trend)	Hazard Ratio (HR)	95% CI	Hazard Ratio (HR)	95% CI
Age		0.37	0.68
	<40 (16) vs. 40–51 (19)			0.54	0.20, 1.41
	<40 vs. 51–62 (18)			0.46	0.17, 1.26
	<40 vs. >62 (18)			0.91	0.33, 2.47
Sex	Female (33) vs. Male (38)	0.073		1.94	0.93, 4.06	1.81	0.87, 3.81
Race	Asian (8), Black (7), Hispanic (3), Mixed (1)	0.15
	Other (19) vs. White (52)	0.56		1.27	0.56, 2.88
Stage	IIB/III (5), IVA (15), IVB (51)	0.075	0.081
	IIB/III/IVA (20) vs. IVB (51)	0.052		2.59	0.99, 6.77	2.65	0.91, 7.17
Histology		0.11
	T (29) vs. TC (34)			2.18	0.98, 4.85	2.07	0.91, 4.69
	T vs. TNET (8)			2.13	0.73, 6.26	1.75	0.59, 5.19
Mesothelin expression	>50 (20) vs. ≤50 (51)	0.53		1.31	0.56, 3.06

T: thymoma; TC: thymic carcinoma; TNET: thymic neuroendocrine tumors;

^*The reference group used to calculate the hazard ratio is indicated first.